- Messages
- 4,440
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ok, here's the scenario: I find I have upto £1000 to spend on a lens and I really want to buy a 70-200 f/2.8. Obviously I can't get a new one within the budget - and no, the budget can't be increased - so I'm thinking either a Nikkor with VR1 or a Sigma with OS.
I've read the reviews of both at DPReview and they get similar ratings. I feel like I should stay brand loyal but I already have a Sigma lens in the bag which I'm really happy with so don't feel compelled to go with Nikon.
Why a 70-200 f/2.8? Well I shoot a lot of judo, which is always indoors and in dimly lit halls/arenas so the bigger aperture is needed. In the UK I can usually get mat-side which means the Sigma 28-70 I already have is fine, but at European competitions they're not so willing to have people standing at the side of the mat and I need to shoot from the gallery - hense the 70-200.
So folks, which do I buy, and why? Should I be looking at any others? Why is life so hard?
I've read the reviews of both at DPReview and they get similar ratings. I feel like I should stay brand loyal but I already have a Sigma lens in the bag which I'm really happy with so don't feel compelled to go with Nikon.
Why a 70-200 f/2.8? Well I shoot a lot of judo, which is always indoors and in dimly lit halls/arenas so the bigger aperture is needed. In the UK I can usually get mat-side which means the Sigma 28-70 I already have is fine, but at European competitions they're not so willing to have people standing at the side of the mat and I need to shoot from the gallery - hense the 70-200.
So folks, which do I buy, and why? Should I be looking at any others? Why is life so hard?

